CDC advises people to wear masks indoors at all times, except at home
Source: Washington Post
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is recommending universal mask use outside peoples homes as part of guidance published Friday aimed at slowing the spread of the coronavirus as the nation braces for what is expected to be the darkest period of the pandemic.
This is the first time the agency has advocated for universal mask use indoors. In its weekly Morbidity and Mortality report, the CDC warned that the United States has entered a phase of high-level transmission as colder weather and the ongoing holiday season push Americans inside, and said that consistent and correct use of face masks is critical to taming the virus.
Compelling evidence now supports the benefits of cloth face masks for both source control (to protect others) the report said, and to a lesser extent, protection of the wearer.
Mask use is most important in indoor spaces where social distancing cannot be maintained, the CDC said in the report. The agency also recommended mask use at home when a member of the household has been infected or potentially exposed to the virus. It cited research that suggests roughly 50 percent of transmission of the coronavirus is spread through asymptomatic people. More than 276,000 Americans have died of the disease caused by the coronavirus so far, and nearly 14.2 million cases have been recorded.
Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/12/04/coronavirus-covid-live-updates-us/#link-VSQFC2ZI2FC3FBXYUKFU7IAQAE
Short article at the moment (NOW UPDATED).
Original article -
This is the first time the agency has advocated for universal mask use indoors. In its weekly Morbidity and Mortality report, the CDC warned that the United States has entered "a phase of high-level transmission" as colder weather and the ongoing holiday season push Americans inside, and said that "consistent and correct" use of face masks is crucial to taming the virus.
As a note, PA reported 11,600 some cases today and Philly reported a mind-numbing 1,816 today.
Midnight Writer
(25,889 posts)ProfessorGAC
(77,462 posts)I just subbed the last 5 days at a high school a couple towns west. (Physics & Environmental Science)
Had mask on leaving the car until I got back in it at end of day. Except to take a drink of water (stepped into the lab store room for that), had mask on the whole time.
No problem.
No problem at all.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)BumRushDaShow
(172,738 posts)with over 11,000 for PA and Philly had 601 on Tues. (12/1/20) 1,665 on Wed. (12/2/20), 825 on Thurs. (12/3/20), and back up to 1,816 today. I know that some of the labs do batch dumps but ugh.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)... that helps to flatten-out the numbers, but it's still so high. So much suffering.
BumRushDaShow
(172,738 posts)was just under 2000/day for PA - https://www.democraticunderground.com/10142446993#post200 and just under 600 for Philly - https://www.democraticunderground.com/10142446993#post183
I kept that thread going daily from March 13 until around Sept. 1st. We have blown past all of that.
Only thing that knocked it down was an almost complete lockdown except for "essential" businesses and as it is, we are still more restrictive here than the rest of the state for a number of things.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)... they don't take Covid or the precautions very seriously.
BumRushDaShow
(172,738 posts)and some of it was due to the fact that it started in the more urban and suburban coastal areas first, with little or nothing inland, so it wasn't considered "a concern" and it was apparently expected to "die out" before ever reaching the more remote/less-populated parts of states. NOW it's everywhere and we see what happens when "community spread" goes "national".
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)... the employment opportunities are few. The Connellsville or Uniontown Walmart are the area's biggest employers. (So that people can, in turn, buy what they need from Walmart... because most other businesses have closed shop.) It's a very depressed area. I've visited there when my husband has returned for weddings, funerals and an occasional reunion (pre-covid, of course) and it's a completely different world.
Now we are not wealthy by ANY means. We live in a double-wide mobile home for God's sake... but compared to the quality of life out there... we're living like royalty. And still they vote for Trump; and still they believe the lies; and still they do everything to help the 1% because they believe that someday they'll be rich too.
It makes me sad whenever he wants to go home. I know it's familiar and comfortable for him... but it's also the reason he left. He knew that if he stayed, that he'd be lucky to someday be the manager at the Sheetz. (Instead he joined the army and GOT OUT of a dead-end town.)
Anyway... it always amazes me how those who have the least... and who are suffering the most... will blindly follow those who cause the most harm and offer the least relief. I'm emotionally exhausted whenever we come home from one of these family gatherings.
BumRushDaShow
(172,738 posts)but they like "style over substance" and that is what it all boils down to. It wouldn't matter what 45 says. It's how he says it.
RobinA
(10,478 posts)in PA, so what is this telling us about mask laws. I'm in the Philadelphia 'burbs and I see no one in stores and such without masks.
BumRushDaShow
(172,738 posts)and an older woman attempted to come in without one. She didn't have it in her hand nor on an ear or around her neck. As she started coming in the door pushing a cart, a store employee looked up and immediately told her "Ma'am, you can't come in here without a mask". She stopped, started digging in her pocketbook, and finally pulled a cloth one out and put it on.
Montco reported something like 683 positives yesterday and 587 cases today.
oldsoftie
(13,538 posts)But Isnt every state telling people to wear them? But the numbers are still jumping. Seems like it should be a much lower number with most of us wearing masks now. I know they're not 100%, but they definitely help SOME. It just doesnt seem to make sense.
I know we're testing more. I pay more attention to the hospitalizations. But those numbers are also jumping.
BumRushDaShow
(172,738 posts)notably one of the worst being hit at the moment - South Dakota.
But what is at issue is that although you may have people wearing masks "in public" -notably at stores, etc. (because many places are requiring them to get inside), they are not wearing them when going to a friend's house for a "game day" get-together or when they go to events like weddings, where you are in a room, at a non-socially-distanced table, across from other non-socially-distanced tables, talking and eating and drinking. And all you need is one asymptomatic infected person at one of these gatherings to start a super-spreader event.
And I expect that most members of family "units" living under the same roof, are not wearing masks "while in the house", so all it takes is one of them to go to their buddy's house to play some video game for a few hours (without a mask because he "trusts" his friend), gets infected, and then comes home and boom!
During periods where there was less of what they call "community spread", you might have been able to get away with that. But now the stuff is just rampant out there.
myohmy2
(3,723 posts)...Joe wants us to wear a mask for 100 days...we can easily do that...and stay home...
...no sense killing Grandpa or Grandma just to go out or get laid...
...for the next 3 months let masturbation be our friend...
...it's mine...
DeminPennswoods
(17,609 posts)to be honest. Outside of the very early Stanford study and another in NYC that were based on antibody tests later discovered to be not as accurate as initially thought, I haven't read about any more recent studies.
Contact tracing might give you idea, but I know in PA that less than half or lower of infected people are cooperating with contact tracers.
BumRushDaShow
(172,738 posts)and indicated that about 20% are most likely truly "asymptomatic" throughout the course of the disease (many others who were initially considered "asymptomatic" were eventually found to have developed some symptoms and were probably "pre-symptomatic" ) - https://www.healthline.com/health-news/20-percent-of-people-with-covid-19-are-asymptomatic-but-can-spread-the-disease#Only-20%-remained-asymptomatic
Meta-analysis publication - https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1003346
The point being that you may have people whose symptoms are not considered by them as "symptoms" and thus may be, or probably are contagious, shedding virus, and spreading it.
DeminPennswoods
(17,609 posts)"pre-symptomatic" than "asymptomatic" carriers. The same is true with flu, that you are contagious a few days before showing symptoms.
The other difficulty is with the PCR tests that detect, but cannot determine how much virus a person has or even if it's a live or remnant of the virus.
BumRushDaShow
(172,738 posts)but the big unanswered question is (and it would probably never be answered) is how much of the viral load would a person need before they might show symptoms, and even then, the symptoms often depend on where the virus lands and takes hold. This is why the whole "checking temperature" is sortof irrelevant unless the tested individual's body actually reacts to this or any virus by developing a fever. If this virus ended up in the digestive system (one of the locations of ACE2 receptors/binding sites), their "symptoms" might end up as something gastrointestinal without any fever, and they might attribute their "symptoms" to something they ate vs being due to COVID-19.
DeminPennswoods
(17,609 posts)They give a positive reading if you have a lot of virus, a DNA remnant of the virus and everything in between.
That's why there's been debate about the rapid tests vs PCR since it takes days or longer for those results to come back. The rapid tests won't give a positive until there's enough virus to register, but if you get one each day, the virus will be detected before the PCR test comes back.
BumRushDaShow
(172,738 posts)is potential for cross-contamination and how that might manifest on a plate - including masking the targeted virus' DNA fragments (I have run gel electrophoresis) - particularly due to how the sampling is happening "in the field" (parking lots, on the street, etc). So that needs to be factored in when calling a test "positive" and would require more time. However, the issue that has been mentioned many times, is that you can test today and get a negative and then test tomorrow and get a positive, and in general, these tests are still more qualitative than quantitative, and the amount of viral load enough to cause someone to have symptoms or suspect they might be having symptoms, is apparently varying quite a bit. In fact, an infection may even be "missed" initially if the virus hasn't settled in the nasal passages/throat where the swabs go, but is multiplying elsewhere, not immediately accessible via the current testing protocols.
Hugin
(38,046 posts)Wear a damn mask.
J Magarac
(73 posts)Because I live on a "good" neighborhood?
BumRushDaShow
(172,738 posts)J Magarac
(73 posts)Near O'Hare Airport.
BumRushDaShow
(172,738 posts)and there are some MAGats and purported "former Obama voters" all in the surrounding area.